Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Dazzler is this another issue you don't support but vote for anyway?

2456711

Comments

  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 24,441
    46XiJCAB said:

    HHusky said:

    Yes, they did…

    a) General Rule.--A health care provider has a statutory right
    under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion
    services, and that provider's patient has a corresponding right to
    receive such services, without any of the following limitations or
    requirements:

    9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when,
    in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care
    provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to
    the pregnant patient's life or health.



    Just make a “good-faith” medical judgment that the pregnant persons “health” is at risk.

    Define good faith and health. Physical health? Mental health? Economic health?

    “If don’t want a boy and if I have one my mental state will be irreparably harmed”

    Right. 'Cuz we can't trust doctors. We need to leave medical decisions up to state legislators.
    Gosnell says hold my beer.

    Fuck off
    He's in prison. If your doctor has his moral compass, get a new doctor.
  • MikeDamone
    MikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Yes, they did…

    a) General Rule.--A health care provider has a statutory right
    under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion
    services, and that provider's patient has a corresponding right to
    receive such services, without any of the following limitations or
    requirements:

    9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when,
    in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care
    provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to
    the pregnant patient's life or health.



    Just make a “good-faith” medical judgment that the pregnant persons “health” is at risk.

    Define good faith and health. Physical health? Mental health? Economic health?

    “If don’t want a boy and if I have one my mental state will be irreparably harmed”

    Right. 'Cuz we can't trust doctors. We need to leave medical decisions up to state legislators.
    What was stated in the tweet is 100% accurate, ma'am.
    That's the kind of "accuracy" we've grown to expect from you and blob.
    Tell us how it's inaccurate, lady
  • 46XiJCAB
    46XiJCAB Member Posts: 20,967
    HHusky said:

    46XiJCAB said:

    HHusky said:

    Yes, they did…

    a) General Rule.--A health care provider has a statutory right
    under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion
    services, and that provider's patient has a corresponding right to
    receive such services, without any of the following limitations or
    requirements:

    9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when,
    in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care
    provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to
    the pregnant patient's life or health.



    Just make a “good-faith” medical judgment that the pregnant persons “health” is at risk.

    Define good faith and health. Physical health? Mental health? Economic health?

    “If don’t want a boy and if I have one my mental state will be irreparably harmed”

    Right. 'Cuz we can't trust doctors. We need to leave medical decisions up to state legislators.
    Gosnell says hold my beer.

    Fuck off
    He's in prison. If your doctor has his moral compass, get a new doctor.
    Gosnell says hold my beer, I'm a doc not a politician.

    Dazzler, fuck off.
  • 46XiJCAB
    46XiJCAB Member Posts: 20,967
    HHusky said:

    46XiJCAB said:

    HHusky said:

    Yes, they did…

    a) General Rule.--A health care provider has a statutory right
    under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion
    services, and that provider's patient has a corresponding right to
    receive such services, without any of the following limitations or
    requirements:

    9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when,
    in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care
    provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to
    the pregnant patient's life or health.



    Just make a “good-faith” medical judgment that the pregnant persons “health” is at risk.

    Define good faith and health. Physical health? Mental health? Economic health?

    “If don’t want a boy and if I have one my mental state will be irreparably harmed”

    Right. 'Cuz we can't trust doctors. We need to leave medical decisions up to state legislators.
    Gosnell says hold my beer.

    Fuck off
    He's in prison. If your doctor has his moral compass, get a new doctor.
    His victims are still dead.

    Dazzler, fuck off.
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 24,441
    edited May 2022
    46XiJCAB said:

    HHusky said:

    46XiJCAB said:

    HHusky said:

    Yes, they did…

    a) General Rule.--A health care provider has a statutory right
    under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion
    services, and that provider's patient has a corresponding right to
    receive such services, without any of the following limitations or
    requirements:

    9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when,
    in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care
    provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to
    the pregnant patient's life or health.



    Just make a “good-faith” medical judgment that the pregnant persons “health” is at risk.

    Define good faith and health. Physical health? Mental health? Economic health?

    “If don’t want a boy and if I have one my mental state will be irreparably harmed”

    Right. 'Cuz we can't trust doctors. We need to leave medical decisions up to state legislators.
    Gosnell says hold my beer.

    Fuck off
    He's in prison. If your doctor has his moral compass, get a new doctor.
    Gosnell says hold my beer, I'm a doc not a politician.

    Dazzler, fuck off.
    PDX wants to ban abortion to stop doctors from committing felonies.

    That's TugCon logic.
  • HHusky
    HHusky Member Posts: 24,441

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Yes, they did…

    a) General Rule.--A health care provider has a statutory right
    under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion
    services, and that provider's patient has a corresponding right to
    receive such services, without any of the following limitations or
    requirements:

    9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when,
    in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care
    provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to
    the pregnant patient's life or health.



    Just make a “good-faith” medical judgment that the pregnant persons “health” is at risk.

    Define good faith and health. Physical health? Mental health? Economic health?

    “If don’t want a boy and if I have one my mental state will be irreparably harmed”

    Right. 'Cuz we can't trust doctors. We need to leave medical decisions up to state legislators.
    What was stated in the tweet is 100% accurate, ma'am.
    That's the kind of "accuracy" we've grown to expect from you and blob.
    Tell us how it's inaccurate, lady
    It's your most frequent technique for lying. Lying by omission.
  • 46XiJCAB
    46XiJCAB Member Posts: 20,967
    HHusky said:

    46XiJCAB said:

    HHusky said:

    46XiJCAB said:

    HHusky said:

    Yes, they did…

    a) General Rule.--A health care provider has a statutory right
    under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion
    services, and that provider's patient has a corresponding right to
    receive such services, without any of the following limitations or
    requirements:

    9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when,
    in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care
    provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to
    the pregnant patient's life or health.



    Just make a “good-faith” medical judgment that the pregnant persons “health” is at risk.

    Define good faith and health. Physical health? Mental health? Economic health?

    “If don’t want a boy and if I have one my mental state will be irreparably harmed”

    Right. 'Cuz we can't trust doctors. We need to leave medical decisions up to state legislators.
    Gosnell says hold my beer.

    Fuck off
    He's in prison. If your doctor has his moral compass, get a new doctor.
    Gosnell says hold my beer, I'm a doc not a politician.

    Dazzler, fuck off.
    PDX wants to ban abortion to stop doctors from committing felonies.

    That's TugCon logic.
    Quote where I've ever called for a ban, Liar. Gosnell's taint will always be on you and I'm here to remind you of that each and every single time you open your sewer hole regarding abortion.
  • MikeDamone
    MikeDamone Member Posts: 37,781
    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    Yes, they did…

    a) General Rule.--A health care provider has a statutory right
    under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion
    services, and that provider's patient has a corresponding right to
    receive such services, without any of the following limitations or
    requirements:

    9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when,
    in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care
    provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to
    the pregnant patient's life or health.



    Just make a “good-faith” medical judgment that the pregnant persons “health” is at risk.

    Define good faith and health. Physical health? Mental health? Economic health?

    “If don’t want a boy and if I have one my mental state will be irreparably harmed”

    Right. 'Cuz we can't trust doctors. We need to leave medical decisions up to state legislators.
    What was stated in the tweet is 100% accurate, ma'am.
    That's the kind of "accuracy" we've grown to expect from you and blob.
    Tell us how it's inaccurate, lady
    It's your most frequent technique for lying. Lying by omission.
    What did I omit? I posted the exact language of the bill, sally.
  • Sledog
    Sledog Member Posts: 38,710 Standard Supporter
    HHusky said:

    46XiJCAB said:

    HHusky said:

    46XiJCAB said:

    HHusky said:

    Yes, they did…

    a) General Rule.--A health care provider has a statutory right
    under this Act to provide abortion services, and may provide abortion
    services, and that provider's patient has a corresponding right to
    receive such services, without any of the following limitations or
    requirements:

    9) A prohibition on abortion after fetal viability when,
    in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care
    provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to
    the pregnant patient's life or health.



    Just make a “good-faith” medical judgment that the pregnant persons “health” is at risk.

    Define good faith and health. Physical health? Mental health? Economic health?

    “If don’t want a boy and if I have one my mental state will be irreparably harmed”

    Right. 'Cuz we can't trust doctors. We need to leave medical decisions up to state legislators.
    Gosnell says hold my beer.

    Fuck off
    He's in prison. If your doctor has his moral compass, get a new doctor.
    Gosnell says hold my beer, I'm a doc not a politician.

    Dazzler, fuck off.
    PDX wants to ban abortion to stop doctors from committing felonies.

    That's TugCon logic.
    No we wnat them to stop murdering children you feckless cunt!